Leonard Pitts's column in the Herald this morning is fairly uncontroversial to anyone who watches the American political scene. Here's his basic thesis: Republicans have lost power, but they'll be back, and hopefully, without the race- and gay- and feminist- and religion-baiting that has led them to power since Nixon.

This isn't a particularly controversial position to take. Yes, the pendulum of power will swing back right again (sad to say) and barring some unexpected occurrence, the Republican party will be the party that represents the right. The one thing that Republicans and Democrats have consistently worked together on in this country is making sure that no matter who's in charge, all the political power is being shared by those two groups.

What can be said in response to this hateful diatribe? It shows that Leonard Pitts, behind all the flowery talk about unity and hope and equality, is a hypocrite who doesn't have a clue what the vast majority of Republicans and conservatives really stand for. That's because he probably doesn't know more than a handful of Republicans/conservatives.

No real counter-argument, no counter-claims, not even an acknowledgment that the Republican party lost every demographic group except white men and even saw their margins shrink in that group during this last election. Nope, their response is that Pitts is ignorant because, ummm, because shut up! is why.

Pitts's point that Republican electoral strategy has been based on othering certain groups of people is also pretty uncontroversial. Nixon's Southern Strategy and Reagan's Cadillac-driving welfare queen set the stage for it, and King George the Lesser scapegoated gays and Muslims like nobody's business, especially in his second "win."

I mean, there's a reason African-Americans voted more than 90% of the time for Democratic Presidential candidates before we nominated Barack Obama and it has a lot to do with the lack of welcome they feel inside the Republican party. Democrats usually win women--the margin changes depending on the circumstances--because we give more than lip service to their issues. The same goes for Latino/as and gays and union members. We're a diverse coalition, and it shows in our caucuses in Congress and in state legislatures and Governor's mansions. And the Republican party, now more than ever before, is pretty much the party of white men.

But not if you're Robert M at Babalu. No, the problem isn't that Republicans have othered so many groups that they're having trouble finding voters who'll hang out with them. No, the problem is that Pitts is uninformed. Keep on with that logic, Robert M. I'm sure it will serve you well in the future.

Update: if Robert M. felt this way toward Leonard Pitts's column, I can't wait to see how he barfs all over Kathleen Parker's. After all, she's a conservative, and she's even more pointed about it than Pitts.